Several weeks ago, I had to be in Washington, D.C., for a 3 p.m. meeting. I also had to be back in Wilmington, Del., at 6:30 p.m., so I opted to take Amtrak between the two cities. I planned to arrive at Union Station with two hours to spare, as I wanted to allow for any delays. It’s a good thing because my train was delayed one hour and 45 minutes for no apparent reason. One minute the train was listed as “on time,” and the next it was late, with no explanation. Waiting for the train would be cutting it close for my meeting, so my only recourse was to take the next train, the Acela, which was on time and delivered me to Union Station with an hour to spare. I was trying to be green and travel by rail, supporting public transportation. In the end, it was a hassle and unreliable. I have traveled around Europe by rail quite a few times without any problems. The high-speed trains in Europe (Eurostar, TGV, ICE Train) are hassle-free and travel over much smoother roadbeds than we have here, allowing them to go much faster. It is inexcusable that the Boston–New York–Washington corridor does not have a smoother roadbed. If it did, it could carry faster trains and provide smoother rides. Also inexcusable is that the government can not give Amtrak enough funding to improve the roadbed or to have enough equipment that when an engine malfunctions, it doesn’t result in grossly delayed or cancelled trains. With the cost of oil rocketing back up to 2008 levels, train travel should be a viable alternative to automobiles. Air travel can be a hassle and gets more expensive by the day. You would think we would learn a lesson and improve our train service. Many years ago, the United States had excellent passenger trains that covered the entire country. We could again with some smart thinking in Washington. It is up to the government to get us back on the rails. — Dick Evans, vice president